It's all about getting the right balances and understanding where you're going to be weak and strong against various opposition. Rashidi has used it to great effect. Have a look in the tactics forum. I had an effective 4-4-2 with Man United, but I enjoyed my 4-2-3-1 far too much tbh

Consider me out too, not sure why I was tagged into a conversation 24 hours we'd already established something
@noikeee, There's a lot there I agree with, and have done for some time.
The move from sliders was phenomenal, but the TC is nowhere near its true potential yet, its very good now, but it could be fundamentally brilliant. Hell, you could make changes to the TC alone each year for the next few years, and you'd fundamentally changing the game for the better each time. Maybe another discussion to be had post release of FM18, i'd be interested to hear your thoughts.

Exactly. Because a counter attack is a moment, rather than a definitive playing style. Between 2006-2009, Man United were described as "counter-attack" side and yet averaged 56% possession and played a relatively high line, and the majority of goals were not on the counter.

You've missed a key point. When you cannot counter attack what are you doing for the rest of the attacking style
1) what do you do when the counter fails
2) what do you do when there is no attack
A "Counter" as you describe isn't one style. A counter attack csn happen at any point, whether you play high risk or low risk football. Liverpool and Watford play very different styles and levels off aggressiveness, yet they both launched counter attacks at times at each other
I'm not mixing up football terms at all tbh . It's because I'm clear on what they are that I don't have this issue.

Muja, I honestly think you need to open your views somewhat. You're very rigid on terminology that is flexible. Counter is far more flexible than you think.
And you absolutely don't have to make a forward come deeper, herne's set up has been my go to style since 2009. My line is always lead by a complete forward attack

Juventus did not score most of their goals through such passes, most of those end up into feet. None of what Juventus do is impossible in the game
And again its also not true most sides score like that. Barcelona under Guardiola averaged 8 through balls per game, most goals were passes into feet in the penalty area
The bold is interesting, because what you describe there is a low risk football played high up the pitch. That is quite literally lower FM mentality football (using Spain as an example here, that would be Counter, short passing, retain possession, more closing down, high defensive line, front 4 with risk passes)
You have a rigid view of footballing descriptions, when in fact they are quite plastic and flexible

You've picked out a 2 minutes reel of an entire season. I'm talking a full 90 minutes, every game. Have a look at statistics for matches and leagues.
It's statistical fact there arent that many successful through balls per game
Possession football is inherently defensive. Spain at their best used as as means of not conceding under Del Bosque, who literally said "they can't score if they don't have the ball.
Just to make the point: That season Juve played 7 through balls per game (total, not just completed), conversely they made 28 crosses per game

To beat a deep lying defence with through balls requires to create space. That's never been different to real life. You cannot play through balls into space for a forward if there is no space for him to run into behind the defence. If you do not do this you will always fail with that kind of approach, again that's no different to real life. The game doesn't make you play any certain way.